Shells, rifle, SN... Who?

[Walt Cakebread]

You have the timeline backwards, Walt. The "Mauser 7.65" claim didn't appear until 1973. It went like this:

Craig didn't mention the rifle at all in his 11/23/63 DCSD report. The rifle is also not mentioned in his 11/23/63 FBI interview.  In his WC testimony in the spring of '64, he testified to being present when the rifle was found, but nothing about its make or caliber. In his '68 LA Free Press interview, he said he didn't know what kind of rifle it was, but had heard that the Mauser was found on the roof. Testifying at the Shaw trial a year later, Craig recounts being present for the discovery of the rifle, never describes it as a Mauser, despite having the opportunity to do so. In his magnum opus, When They Kill a President, Craig said that Weitzman ID'ed the rifle as a Mauser, but Craig remained silent on his own identification of it.  Finally, in 1973, Craig claimed to have seen "Mauser 7.65" on the weapon.

I think that you'll find that Roger Craig did say the rifle was a 7.65 Mauser.   But It really doesn't matter WHEN he made that statement....It has taken root and many fools actually believe it...   The posts on this thread prove that there are idiots who refuse to use their God given eyes and brain and continue to argue that the rifle was a Mauser and it was switched for the carcano to frame Lee Oswald.

[Gary Craig]

Weitzman signed this sworn notarized affidavit on Saturday the 23rd.

[Walt Cakebread]

Here's proof that the identification of the rifle as as 7.65 Mauser was thought to be the truth on 11/22/63....

[Jack Trojan]

I think that you'll find that Roger Craig did say the rifle was a 7.65 Mauser.   But It really doesn't matter WHEN he made that statement....It has taken root and many fools actually believe it...   The posts on this thread prove that there are idiots who refuse to use their God given eyes and brain and continue to argue that the rifle was a Mauser and it was switched for the carcano to frame Lee Oswald.

Weitzman said it was a 7.65 Mauser too. According to you, Craig got it from him. But neither of them read anything off the barrel, right? Since Weitzman was no expert, he couldn't just make a guess and leave it at that. He had to examine the rifle to confirm it, right? So how could he have examined the rifle on the 22nd and sign an affidavit the next day claiming it was a 7.65 Mauser? That's a pretty specific mistake under the circumstances which only a fool would think was irrelevant.

The only way for you to prove your case is to show the film frames where Fritz handed the rifle to Weitzman and after having examined it, claimed it was a 7.65 Mauser, then handed it back to Fritz. That's Weiztman's testimony. Then you must take a screen grab of the best quality frame from that sequence and positively ID the rifle as a MC and not a Mauser. That is the only way you can keep from looking more like an idiot with your "extract your head and see it with your own eyes" horseshit. Otherwise, you're shilling for the conspirators no different than a LNer.

There very well might not have been a Mauser, but sure as hell not because you say so.

[Walt Cakebread]

Weitzman said it was a 7.65 Mauser too. According to you, Craig got it from him. But neither of them read anything off the barrel, right? Since Weitzman was no expert, he couldn't just make a guess and leave it at that. He had to examine the rifle to confirm it, right? So how could he have examined the rifle on the 22nd and sign an affidavit the next day claiming it was a 7.65 Mauser? That's a pretty specific mistake under the circumstances which only a fool would think was irrelevant.

The only way for you to prove your case is to show the film frames where Fritz handed the rifle to Weitzman and after having examined it, claimed it was a 7.65 Mauser, then handed it back to Fritz. That's Weiztman's testimony. Then you must take a screen grab of the best quality frame from that sequence and positively ID the rifle as a MC and not a Mauser. That is the only way you can keep from looking more like an idiot with your "extract your head and see it with your own eyes" horseshit. Otherwise, you're shilling for the conspirators no different than a LNer.

There very well might not have been a Mauser, but sure as hell not because you say so.

There very well might not have been a Mauser, but sure as hell not because you say so.

How stupid are you?.....I have never ever said anybody should simply accept my word....I have repeatedly told everybody to OPEN their eyes and LOOK at Tom Alyea's film of Detective Day examining the rifle, and decide for themselves.

[Jack Trojan]

There very well might not have been a Mauser, but sure as hell not because you say so.

How stupid are you?.....I have never ever said anybody should simply accept my word....I have repeatedly told everybody to OPEN their eyes and LOOK at Tom Alyea's film of Detective Day examining the rifle, and decide for themselves.

How stupid are you?.....What makes you so sure that the rifle Day is holding in the Alyea film is the same rifle that Craig and Weitzman were referring to? Did you even read my last post? Find the part in the film where Weitzman is examining the rifle and I will OPEN my lying eyes and concede your point. And since Weitzman was no expert, how did HE know the caliber of a Mauser was "7.65"? Did YOU know that Mr. self-described "expert" who CLAIMS to own a Carcano. Or is that just another one of your legendary fabrications? Why don't you take a backyard photo of yourself holding it with today's paper to prove it. 

[Walt Cakebread]

How stupid are you?.....What makes you so sure that the rifle Day is holding in the Alyea film is the same rifle that Craig and Weitzman was referring to? Did you even read my last post? Find the part in the film where Weitzman is examining the rifle and I will OPEN my lying eyes and concede your point. And since Weitzman was no expert, how did HE know the caliber of a Mauser was "7.65"? Did YOU know that Mr. self-described "expert" who CLAIMS to own a Carcano. Or is that just another one of your legendary fabrications? Why don't you take a backyard photo of yourself holding it with today's paper to prove it. 

Jack, I'm through debating with you...You're a bona fide idiot.......